Nery Rocha-Guzman v. DOES / Haris Design & Construction Co.

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 14-AA-612 09/28/2017 NERY S. ROCHA-GUZMÁN, PETITIONER, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, RESPONDENT, and HARIS DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, et al., * INTERVENORS. On Petition for Review of Decision and Order of the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services Compensation Review Board (CRB-006-14) (Submitted May 7, 2015 Decided September 28, 2017) Michael J. Kitzman was on the brief for petitioner. Eugene A. Adams, Interim Attorney General for the District of Columbia at the time the statement was filed, Todd S. Kim, Solicitor General, Loren L. AliKhan, Deputy Solicitor General, and Donna M. Murasky, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Solicitor General, filed a statement in lieu of brief for * There is a discrepancy in the parties’ filings with respect to the spelling of the intervening party’s name. This opinion refers to the intervenor as Haris Design & Construction Company. 2 respondent. Mary G. Weidner was on the brief for intervenors. Before GLICKMAN and EASTERLY, Associate Judges, and RUIZ, Senior Judge. RUIZ, Senior Judge: This petition for review arises from Nery Rocha- Guzmán’s claim for worker’s compensation benefits due to permanent total disability resulting from an injury sustained while working for his former employer, Haris Design & Construction Co. (“Haris Design”). Petitioner seeks review of an order of the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services (“DOES”) Compensation Review Board (“CRB”) which affirmed a compensation order issued by DOES Administrative Hearings Division Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) Linda F. Jory denying petitioner’s claim. We hold that the CRB erred in affirming the ALJ’s compensation order, and thus remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. Petitioner worked as a foreman on construction and renovation projects for Haris Design. His primary duties were to convey the English-speaking superintendent’s work assignments to the Spanish-speaking construction crew and to monitor the crew’s work. 3 On August 9, 2010, when the crew was short two workers, petitioner filled in for one of the workers. While petitioner was standing on a roof, it gave way, and petitioner’s legs went through the roof, causing him injuries. Petitioner initially sought worker’s compensation benefits for temporary total disability, which the parties stipulated arose out of his employment with Haris Design, and the employer paid two lump-sum payments. After receiving treatment for his injuries, petitioner returned to work in November or December of 2010. However, in February 2011, petitioner’s employment with Haris Design was terminated on the basis of a review of the employer’s personnel records which revealed insufficient documentation that petitioner, who came to this country from Bolivia, was authorized to work in the United States. Two years later, petitioner sought permanent total disability benefits as of April 2013, claiming that his ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals